British 2015 Round by Round

[Tim Harding]

I knew the game would have an uneventful end and so nipped out to Tesco

Very wise. My whole evening has been ruined by watching this...

[Tim Harding]

Meanwhile, I see that we have three leaders on 100%: Hawkins, Hebden and Richard Pert. All due Black.

So what contortions will the TD perform to avoid Pert v Pert tomorrow?

Hebden won another probably lost game today; his opponent played a nice strategic refutation of the Barry and ate a pawn Hebden fed him but ran very short of time in the process. The inevitable blunder occurred as Hebden trapped his Q.

[LawrenceCooper]

Meanwhile, I see that we have three leaders on 100%: Hawkins, Hebden and Richard Pert. All due Black.

So what contortions will the TD perform to avoid Pert v Pert tomorrow?

Hebden won another probably lost game today; his opponent played a nice strategic refutation of the Barry and ate a pawn Hebden fed him but ran very short of time in the process. The inevitable blunder occurred as Hebden trapped his Q.

They normally float the middle so I expect Flear to float up to play Hebden assuming there are no problems pairing the 10 others on 2.5.

[Roger de Coverly]

Meanwhile, I see that we have three leaders on 100%: Hawkins, Hebden and Richard Pert. All due Black.

So what contortions will the TD perform to avoid Pert v Pert tomorrow

If they're following CAA rules, I would expect a float for Hebden and for Hawkins to play Pert. Higher rated retains colour sequence, so Pert v Hawkins.

FIDE rules (Swiss Perfect) would float Pert and pair Hebden v Hawkins

It's usual that pairing players of the same score outranks colour sequences.

[Simon Ansell]

Just flicking through the round 3 games quickly and Jack Rudd's middlegame rook manouevre from e7 to a5, via e1 and a1, to trap an errant knight on b6 is a thing of beauty

[Nick Grey]

Most impressive start by Alex G.
I'll not worry about pairings - always seem to favour highest rather than lowest rating.

The arbiter/controller/pairer is always right.
As an ex-rugby player you went back 10y/m if open mouth. Even In footie get a yellow for a query.

[Keith Arkell]

How/Why is Keith Arkell posting at [2.58pm] when he should be head-down sweating on his Taimanov v. Alex Golding?

Just asking.

[edit] oh, the time changed just now to [1.58pm]. But my post says [3.16pm] and it's in fact [4.16pm]

Actually, David, I did indeed post 2 minutes before the game. I figured that either one should spend a whole day learning the Taimanov, before the tournament, or just play it spontaneously. But definitely don't do an exhausting 2 hour crash course just before the game.

To be fair to my opponent he played very well - much better than Magnus against me at the same age

[Roger de Coverly]

Perhaps it's different for those resident at Warwick, but the announcement of the pairings for the Championships seems to be getting later and later. In the era of fixed seven hour sessions starting at 2.15pm, the answer machine of the pairings in Lara's dulcet tones was usually available by 10pm at the latest. Smartphones made the answer phone method redundant, because you went to the website instead, but the principle of knowing the pairings before last orders was maintained.

[John McKenna]

R4 -

1. IM Pert Richard G 2440 (3) - (3) GM Hawkins Jonathan 2554
2. GM Flear Glenn C 2450 (2½) - (3) GM Hebden Mark L 2500
3. GM Williams Simon K 2426 (2½) - (2½) GM Howell David W L 2698
4. GM Pert Nicholas 2562 (2½) - (2½) GM Ward Chris G 2423
5. GM Arkell Keith C 2502( 2½) - (2½) FM Jackson James P 2343
6. GM Gormally Daniel W 2484 (2½) - (2½) Kalaiyalahan Akshaya 1999
7. Golding Alex 1963 (2½) - (2½) GM Emms John M 2460
8. GM Summerscale Aaron P 2416 (2) - (2) Okhai Shabir 1994
9. Beckett Chris J 2160 (2) - (2) FM Batchelor Peter J 2304
10. Paterson Andrew I 2039 (2) - (2) Weaving Richard 2257
...

http://chess-results.com/tnr179427.aspx ... =30&wi=821

[LawrenceCooper]

Perhaps it's different for those resident at Warwick, but the announcement of the pairings for the Championships seems to be getting later and later. In the era of fixed seven hour sessions starting at 2.15pm, the answer machine of the pairings in Lara's dulcet tones was usually available by 10pm at the latest. Smartphones made the answer phone method redundant, because you went to the website instead, but the principle of knowing the pairings before last orders was maintained.

This year has been approximately 22:45, 22:15 and 00:15. After last night I may have to revise my plan of staying up to post the pairings on Facebook to save my friends the task of refresh/F5 until the early hours

[Chris Rice]

Before round 1 the organisers announced that they would only promise to make the pairings available before 11am on the day. They went on to say not to bother ringing up the night before if the pairings weren't up because they would probably be doing better things. I'm not sure I care that much but I assumed these days that as soon as the last result was in you just pressed a button and the pairings would automatically come up. Presumably the delay is someone has to manually check it to ensure that the Perts aren't playing each other. Presumably if such an event occurred there would be much gnashing of teeth and another round of drinks to be called for while they sort it out....

[Jonathan Rogers]

R4 -

1. IM Pert Richard G 2440 (3) - (3) GM Hawkins Jonathan 2554
2. GM Flear Glenn C 2450 (2½) - (3) GM Hebden Mark L 2500
3. GM Williams Simon K 2426 (2½) - (2½) GM Howell David W L 2698
4. GM Pert Nicholas 2562 (2½) - (2½) GM Ward Chris G 2423
5. GM Arkell Keith C 2502( 2½) - (2½) FM Jackson James P 2343
6. GM Gormally Daniel W 2484 (2½) - (2½) Kalaiyalahan Akshaya 1999
7. Golding Alex 1963 (2½) - (2½) GM Emms John M 2460
8. GM Summerscale Aaron P 2416 (2) - (2) Okhai Shabir 1994
9. Beckett Chris J 2160 (2) - (2) FM Batchelor Peter J 2304
10. Paterson Andrew I 2039 (2) - (2) Weaving Richard 2257
...

http://chess-results.com/tnr179427.aspx ... =30&wi=821

So, 5 Guildford players and 4 Cheddleton players among the top ten boards.

But only 3 Guildford GMs as opposed to 4 Cheddleton GMs. Guildford have "the lead" in terms of presence of players because two of their Guildford 3 players, Alex Golding and Akshaya, are doing so well.

Naturally Alex has grabbed all the headlines. Oh, to be 11 and all that. But Akshaya's win over John Cooper was perhaps the most striking game played by anyone in the competition so far - she outplayed her opponent throughout and finished him off, and I wonder whether this is her first win v IM in rated chess?

[Roger de Coverly]

I'm not sure I care that much but I assumed these days that as soon as the last result was in you just pressed a button and the pairings would automatically come up.

That's what ought to happen and the way that it's done in better run weekend tournaments. There are, however, those in senior positions in the management of the British Championships who wish computers had never been invented and will make every possible excuse to avoid using them. Their excuse in this case, I would imagine, is that the results management system being used, chess-results, does not support their home made CAA pairing system.

It is a long established tradition in the British Championships proper that the pairings are made available the night before and those wishing to break this should be shouted at, not that they will take the slightest notice.

[Michael Flatt]

It is difficult to justify the use of the traditional UK Swiss pairing system (taking the float from the median) if the available software doesn't support it.

Similarly, the reasons for avoiding pairings between siblings can't really be justified in a National Individual Championship, especially when the players in question are amongst the strongest in the competition.

In the Open Major, I noticed that two players with the same surname and same club managed to avoid each other in both rounds 3 and 4. I think that it is quite likely that they will meet in a later round when the outcome of their game will take on greater significance.

These issues really need to be brought to the attention of the Organisers and for the players to be canvassed for their opinions.

[IM Jack Rudd]

The Talbots weren't due to play each other in round 3 or round 4, so the issue didn't arise.